Light Weight Fixed?

meagain

In these days of 15-18lb race bikes, one might expect that it should be relatively easy to acquire a fixed towards the top of that range. But HOW and WITH what is not obvious to me at least. Guess would have to be an alu frame and carbon forks at the heart of it - BUT the only one I've come across with the right d'outs is at Byers Cycles. Anyone know any others? Preferably that have been around long enough to appear 2nd hand?

I supppose the ultimate would be a carbon track frame - but awfully expensive and not what I'd want for tarmac anyway.

Are any of the new breed of fashionista fixstas noticeably "light"? (I quite like that term - not sure I've seen it before!)

gkerr4

the langster is!

i couldn't believe the weight of it (or lack of weight) when I got it.

it's probably not much heavier than my S-works roubaix which is about 8 times as expensive. and the langster is pretty much std at the moment bar the s-works aero handlebars. I'm looking for some new wheels at the moment which should reduce the weight even further

Pirahna

How about a 12 pound TCR

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum ... hp?t=41776


or a 13 pound Langster

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum ... hp?t=41774

meagain

Pirahna wrote:

How about a 12 pound TCR

Fine - but not fixed! I can see how to do say a 16 lb s/s quite cheaply, cos frames easily come by.

The "13 pound Langster" is more interesting! Research needed....

Thanks.

Pete Beer

Condor do a aluminium framed carbon forked Pista which is quite nice. But my steel frame stripped Argos track bike is lighter and much more fun to ride. Hence I sold the Condor last year.

gkerr4

wow thats light.

I can't see the carbon chainring lasting long mind!

also, he quotes 1550 for the wheels - i'd have thought a lower spoke count set of handbuilts would have been lighter than that (or could be lighter than that if you had enough money to throw at them!)

meagain

"steel frame stripped Argos track bike is lighter"

What steel is the frameset? Presumably it's the components that fetch the overall weight down below alu and carbon?

gkerr4

there aren't a huge amount of components to strip the weight from!

rustychisel

true, but some judicious choices make a hell of a lot of difference.

A light aluminium frame is good... and for wheels forgo the deeper section rims. If you go Velocity Deep Vs to be smart looking you'll have some heavy wheels. End of story. Go lighter 32 or 28 spoke on box rims and forget about skid stopping. Be prepared to get your fat arse out of the saddle for riding the bumps.
Forget 1/8 for road fixed, go with 3/32, you'll save about 60g on the chain alone and maybe up to 350g on sprocket and chainrings and chain.
Find a nice carbon seatpost, a strong aluminium stem, and don't forget you'll save 150~200g easily by installing some modern light handlebars rather than Cinelli 65s or whatever. Saddles, drop the boat anchor you Brooks tart and get an SLR (although I'm not that hard, I went for an Arione, a veritable heifer at 270g). And finally, go lightweight tyres and make that baby sing. Why use 400g commuter tyres when you can use 180g Conti sprinters and save 440g just there alone. 440g, that's a pound!
So there, it's all do-able, you just join weight weenies to find out how to become a complete knob about it.

meagain

As to-the-point as ever, rusty'!

The many old steel fixeds I've had have been ver' pretty, but far from feather-weights. I guess that in affordability terms a used Langster (preferably just F&F) has to be the starting point. I shall be looking...

GaryGkn

I have a very light steel Rotrax (1965) frame it is not fixed or even built up but it is steel and 531 but feels much lighter than it should it also has a very nice ring to it. You should be able to achieve a light fix with the components and materials mentioned previously. I think more challenging would be a steel fix that matches the weight of an ali and carbon fork frame set.

meagain

"I have a very light steel Rotrax (1965) frame "

As I recall mine was a '59. Yes, light by standards of they days, but compared with ali + carbon surely not? Mine was pretty minimalist but I very much doubt it came in sub-20 lbs. Might have shed 1.5 with carbon bars, post, SLR etc. BUT the heart of the beast would always be heavy!

Pete Beer

Even with tubs and absolutely everything else stripped back that's probably true. But I know which I'd prefer to ride.

meagain

It WAS very pretty however!



WHICH would you prefer, Pete?

Pete Beer

Very nice but I prefer this one...
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff19 ... sFixed.jpg

meagain

Yup - pink is always my favourite, but those bars would be *beyond* me!

Maroon is good also!

meagain

So MANY have passed through the garage...Sid Mottram:

GaryGkn

Where can you get bike scales?

meagain

Fishing tackle shops?

Pete Beer

Use fishing scales or I use the bathroom scales.

GaryGkn

Cheers!

do you know if there are any plans for that BBC4 Bicycle history program to be re-shown?

NorwegianBlue

I've always found light weight bikes to be overrated. I've ridden light and I've ridden heavy, and I don't find there's that much difference. Certainly not worth the price premium that light weight usually carries. After all you have to move the whole package; bike, rider and gear. So a 10lb weight saving on the bike may well be 50% of the bike, but it might not even come up to 5% of the whole package.

Just an example I know, but I rode one very light carbon road bike last year that was frankly scary on downhill corners. The fork (and maybe the wheel contributed) flexed so much on the brakes into bends that I was having to get my braking over in a straight line and corner more slowly than I would on a heavier bike. What's the point in a slight climbing advantage if your lose it and much more on the following downhill?

Granted lighter wheels make for faster acceleration, braking and direction changes, but they are only a small part of the whole bike's weight.

Light weight seems to me to be one of those obsessions, like setup and gearing that detract from your performance rather than improve it. In a way they almost become an excuse. Back in the day (more years agi than I care to rememberor admit) I used to time trial with a few guys from the school cycling club. There was one bloke who had by far the lightest most expensive bike of any of us. Sometimes he was the fastest of our group, sometimes he wasn't, but whatever his overall time and position on the day he always complained that he'd chosen the wrong gearing. He had about ten rings in all and half a dozen blocks but whatever combination he fitted he always moaned he would have been faster had he chosen a different set of ratios. The same goes for weight. An old XC mate of mine has been gradually paring weight from his bikes for twenty years and always claims that he would have placed higher if only his bike was that bit lighter.

There's a lot I don't like about the current trend for fixed and single speed bikes, mainly the fact that it is a trend. But one thing I really like about it is that it seems devoid of weight weenies.

When it comes to getting maximum performance from your power input, stiffness and low rolling resistance count for more, in my ever so humble opinion. My old 2005 Langster (the old frame and fork) was very stiff, although not very comfortable. The only fly in the performance ointment was the wheelset which although heavy still had a fair amount of give, which tended to absorb a bit of power.

Just my 2p
h
Cheers,

GJ

bonk man

2 or 3 lbs doesn't mean much, within that range build is more important however when it is 5 or 6 lbs that is noticeable to most people.

But it is horses for courses, my old Aerospace was around 15lbs in fixed time trialling mode which was ok but flexed badly, my Mike Morris steel lo-pro tt fixed is about 20lbs and is not flexible and is consequently faster,,,, but not much, takes longer to get up to speed but feels less bendy..

My Mercian is going fixed soon and that will be interesting I think. Very comfortable and should be light as well, around 19 lbs without the tool kit I tend to carry about everywhere that makes a mockery of having a lightweight bike

NorwegianBlue

I know exactly where you're coming from with the tool kit. Tougher tyre may be heavier and slower, but run lightweight tyres and you'll need to carry emergency supplies which may well offset the advantage.

I used to run Kenda Thorn Resistant tubes in my commuter and I switched to ordinary tubes because they felt slow. Sure the standard tubes felt, and indeed probably were faster I probably had a lower average speed when taken over a reasonable period of time due to the time spent fixing flats. Light weight can be an advanage, but it brings to mind the adage to finish first, first you must finish.

On the subject of which, I got my bike out the other day and my two year old son told me that I had "a flat pudger". It took me a few seconds to cotton on that he meant puncture. I thought at first that he was casting aspertions on my anatomy.

GJ